DUST Search - Sticky:[DISCUSSION]

All Channels

General Discussions

Sticky:[DISCUSSION] - Progression

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 28 post(s)
Oswald Rehnquist 1355	Posted - 2014.05.17 06:59:00 - [451] - Quote Read every single post here, phew!! @ CCP Z [Progression] This is just food for thought, hopefully there is something useful in here. 1) Identity People orient themselves and identify their play styles by variations of 1) dropsuit, 2) race, and/or 3) weapon choice. Your proposal is organized by dropsuit/role (and what you want paired with it), which is very traditional in the fps world. Another very common model is organized around weapon specialization. So while the dropsuits are streamlined, you effectively bastardize weapons with the set up. From the wording and imaging presented, a weapon's variants (Breach, Assault, etc) seem to be scattered far around different branches of a tree. Which is very convoluted for something so pivotal to identity. One's weapon of choice is on par with ones dropsuit/role. If I am a master sniper, then organizing my progression becomes a little convoluted, which is contrary to what you guys are looking for. TL/DR: Weapon identity is important to consider 2) Taking race out of weapons? Another logical guess I'm garnered from your progression system, seeing how mass drivers: Variant A are a logis tool, and how variants are broken up, weapons are no longer based on race on a functional level, and while there aren't any specific modules mention, modules seem to be based off of suits now. I find this rather interesting because racial/factional pride is massive in games, in fact almost all pvp games use it, it creates tension, it creates themes, rping, etc. Having to chase racial purity (or the loss of it?) is definitely a new concept. I think I just have more questions than anything else, like what module is logi based? And would that favor one of the racial variants more down the line? 3) Handling Changes The current set up will make it a massive pain to add new content or new weapons. Sticking new weapons on an arbitrary suit let alone opening up a new suit idea but lacking weapons to fill it out means that once this system is set, new suits are almost unlikely at all, and any changes would have to be suit variants of previous ones, thus some stifling in suit creativity. Again, just food for thought. I also understand this CCP Z wrote: The Current system is too fast, too many weapons, modules, drop suits given away to quickly. but there are a few other ways of increasing the sp sink, which is what I believe the module and weapon variant scattering was intended for, I just find this method slightly unorganized and in a way more complicated, again mainly based on the fact that weapon pursuits and or racial purity is not how the tree is organized, which are the two other major forms of identification. I don't have the full picture, so very likely most of the things I'm typing may not be relevant or you already thought of a way of countering it. But I do strongly think that the weapon variant scattering is convoluted. Below 28 dB
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1321	Posted - 2014.05.17 07:13:00 - [452] - Quote Malkai Inos wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: [...]They've researched and identified with their own numbers short comings in the current system, both in the progression system and the NPE. Questioning the findings of the research because it happens to not agree with your view isn't going to alter the Dev teams trust in its findings either. Besides, I think we can all agree, that nearly everyone on this thread, defending Z or not has highlighted shortcomings in the current system. [...] I happen to question them because we know nothing substantial about this research other than the claim of it's existence and the assertion that the proposed system is a sensible response to its findings. Yes, the current system isn't perfect but that doesn't mean that the proposed system is the only, let alone optimal, alternative. We have no idea what they've been looking for, we don't know how they decided to look, we don't know what they've found and, most critically, we don't know how their findings ended up informing the proposed design other than the blunt assertion that people cannot handle the current system. This is important because, as several others have pointed out, assuming the research was sound and accepting CCP Z's et al. stated conclusion still doesn't tell us why a visual guiding frame (ISIS) wrapped around the current system, or really anything else that doesn't change the actual progression on any fundamental level, wouldn't work Also well elaborated in multiple posts is the fact that central concepts such as "no respecs" being the default position, players having full freedom of their skill choices without being soft-locked into arbitrary roles and the full distinction between your character and whatever gear he might be using at any given time are discarded, seemingly, without further consideration of their inherent place within the existing universe that is New Eden. Based on that. The proposed changes require some prior justification that goes beyond "95% of the people don't get it". Providing insight as to what this research is all about would be a reasonable first step. Edit: Yes I get and agree with your overall call for some civility and appreciation. Yes I am deliberately confrontational because getting some info on why CCP Z chose the proposed design is vital in My opinion. Thank you being civil and constructive. As a counter argument I'd say this. Who here demanded to see all the research and the methodology behind it before they swallowed a couple of painkillers? Or enquired as to the quality of the peer review behind the research which led to Pepto Pismol? I'm all for being more empirical in such choices but really, asking or even demanding as some have in this thread, details of a computer game company's R&D process is taking perceived entitlement to a new level. My point is, we'll all happily put into our bodies a pill given to us by a doctor without thought as to how it came to be. But when research finds that changes to a computer game are needed...... CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
Meisterjager Jagermeister Red and Silver Hand Amarr Empire 133	Posted - 2014.05.17 07:20:00 - [453] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: The current default Assault has two light weapons. Does the Assault still have a grenade slot? Don't take away the grenade!!! AKA - StarVenger
Hawkings Greenback Red Star. EoN. 148	Posted - 2014.05.17 07:38:00 - [454] - Quote Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: Days later and I still don't like the concept of this proposed progression system for pretty much every reason people have posted. I'm definitely getting the classic CCP Dust Development vibe of "we're going to do what we want on this with the illusion of feedback." The current skill system we have works to a certain extent but has it's obvious problems. 1/3/5 is bad. Items should be unlocked at 1 and every point after should provide a bonus. Why is this difficult? The idea that "there's too much choice" is simply silly. Yes, at first there is a bit too much choice but this can be remedied by a certification system similar to eve's. It can give you an idea of a "vanilla" role and you can go from there. You guys seem so ridiculously deadset on the idea that your players are idiots and it's insulting. Part of the biggest problem of NPE is that they don't know where to put their SP to make a decent build and also that weapons are incredibly imbalanced. We want depth and customization, not progression on rails until you hit end game. Stop trying to reinvent the progression and just fix the problems the current system has and make sure weapons and suits are balanced properly. It's a shame I can only give you 1 like. CCP take note this post summed up every feeling I have about your proposal for the new skill layout without (in my opinion) being overly harsh and sounding like QQ. Please take all this feedback on board from this thread. People want this to work. Learn from what you already know and have. GÇ£Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.GÇ¥ GÇò Frank Zappa
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1321	Posted - 2014.05.17 08:01:00 - [455] - Quote Hawkings Greenback wrote: Snip Interesting Zappa quote in your sig. Somewhat pertinent, given the discussion in this thread. CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10802	Posted - 2014.05.17 10:35:00 - [456] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: CCP Z wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Feedback on Progression I like a lot the sidegrades idea and that is something that our Design Team is currently looking at (more or less modules, different weapon types, different abilities like being able to hack or not ...) At Fanfest you mentioned after the race choice in the skill tree there are these specializations. Can you give any examples or details about these specializations? If the commando doesn't make it into Legion, can there be an assault specialization with 2 light weapons? possibly at the cost of something else. Also, can you share some monetization ideas? The current default Assault has two light weapons. Commandos haven't really been worked on yet, but if they stick around it's likely they'll have a new role. Commandos could get 1 heavy weapon and 1 light weapon (some rebalancing would be needed), or perhaps they could be turned into the area-of-effect bonus/debuff suits. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Natu Nobilis DUST BRASIL S.A Caps and Mercs 488	Posted - 2014.05.17 10:46:00 - [457] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: Who here demanded to see all the research and the methodology behind it before they swallowed a couple of painkillers? Or enquired as to the quality of the peer review behind the research which led to Pepto Pismol? I'm all for being more empirical in such choices but really, asking or even demanding as some have in this thread, details of a computer game company's R&D process is taking perceived entitlement to a new level. My point is, we'll all happily put into our bodies a pill given to us by a doctor without thought as to how it came to be. But when research finds that changes to a computer game are needed...... Did anyone ask Picasso what was in his head? Your memory do you no justice fellow player. Here is what i said: Natu Nobilis wrote: First question i have is about the methodology of your study, the sample space and these things, because if the questions were linked to the Dust skill tree, then you have a serious bias compromising your study. Hardly a demand of anything. Simply a question (almost rethorical) to present some variables that may not have been taken in account. Again, you should check the reference instead of what your memory and personal bias may be leading you to. Some players may not be familiar with the steps involved in a study (or how scientific work is done in general) and i insist on the methodology topic (again, i-¦m not demanding anything, i-¦m suggesting that certain variables may ahve been overlooked) because i happened to reply a questionary about Dust 514 made by CCP, and from what i remembered, i reviewed the skill tree system very very poorly. With the way DUST questionary asked questions, i may be one of the 95% that bashed the skill tree system. (That i don-¦t know if it served as basis for their internal conclusions) Do i hate the Tree Skill system? No. Do i hate DUST-¦s pseudo-Tree Skill system? YES. See the difference and how a badly formulated question may induce error? If two separate and different systems are called "Dust Skill Tree" my answers will either favour a badly implemented skilltree like the one we have now, or point to the removal of said skill tree, when all i wnated was for it to be properly implemented without the 1-3-5 unlock, with all of them giving bonus to something, and all that i pointed previously. You are not "just another forum poster", you-¦re a CPM candidate, and quite frankly, Ad Hominem does you no service. If you have questions, i would be more than glad to answer and try to explain my line of thought, but putting words in my mouth, and doing a deturpation of what i said it-¦s not cool man. I-¦ve read all the 23 pages of the discussion, i tried to give structured feedback, and of course i-¦m trying to make a point for something i believe, specially when the counterpoint is not presented or structured (All in all, that we have of the new progression system is a vague idea with a Fanfest presentation and some replies from CCP Z) (Other counterpoints may or not be what CCP Z have in mind, so may be classified as a third or more proposed system) I love UNI and i recommend new players to you guys, both in Dust and EVE, but YOU, specially as a Candidate, if you can-¦t look at a line of reasoning in a cold, clinical way, and bash other players on public forum trying to mock them, that-¦s really not cool man, and that-¦s a characteristic that worries me about representation in the council. If you can-¦t try to comprehend what players with unpopular opinios are saying, how can you represent them? Food for your thought, not a demand, threat or something, only a call to reflexion.
Vell0cet Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 2059	Posted - 2014.05.17 15:35:00 - [458] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: Actually Z has already posted in the positive in regard to the ISIS question. I know we've had a few disagreements in this discussion. I drafted up a progression proposal and made a thread. The goal is to retain the depth of the existing system but make it more accessible for new players. As the CEO of the most well-known and respected organizations for training new players, and as a CPM 1 candidate, I would really appreciate any feedback you might have. You would probably have some unique and useful insights. Best PvE idea ever!
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1323	Posted - 2014.05.17 15:40:00 - [459] - Quote Thanks for feedback Natu and I do take it on board. Just a couple of points. I quoted Malkai in the the post you quoted because he was the last person (but not the only) in the thread to speak of asking for research. Nothing personal Malkai o7. I made no mention of names, so its a big assumption that I meant you particular. But I apologise if I've caused you to believe so, when as you say you didn't demand but you were the first to question it. Secondly, as any member or former member of the CPM or CSM will tell, getting CCP to show them details of internal research is like pulling teeth. And they've signed an NDA. So the chances of getting such research posted publicly when it might involve proprietary information that CCP don't want making public, isn't something that could or should be reasonably expected. As to what you said here "If you can-¦t try to comprehend what players with unpopular opinions are saying, how can you represent them?", in this particular instance I'm the one with the unpopular opinion in this thread, because I think what Z has come up with is pretty damn good and I've spent 23 pages defending him. Being a member of CPM does mean that that I would have act as an advocate for the players. But am I not allowed an opinion? Would I be expected to slavishly agree with everything that was said by the players? Of course not, I'd be riddled with indecision and be of no use to the playerbase or to CCP. I have to look at all the information from both sides, form an opinion as to the best way to proceed that will not only benefit the players but benefit the long term future of the game. And Z's system in my judgement, will do both. It needs the odd tweak but it's how we should go. Is that the popular view? Judging by this thread so far, certainly not. My reasoning for such an unpopular stance is an ugly truth. The player numbers are dwindling. Radical changes in thinking are needed and long held assumption must be cast away if this game is to greenlit and successful. Simply tinkering with the current systems in game is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It needs a rocket fuelled enema kicking up its arse. Legion has to be greenlit, if it isn't, it's game over. For it to be greenlit, CCP need it to be a success. Rouge and Z were brought in for a reason. Check out their histories. They've worked on a long line of successful FTP games. A proven track record. The Dev's are more fired up and energised for this than I've ever seen them in the past and Rouge is the reason why. I'll of course be a strong voice for the players and do everything I can to help them in the CPM or not. But right now, on this issue, I have to be on CCP's side because the long term future of the game is at stake here. If that makes me unpopular so be it. If it loses me your vote, so be it. But I will not back down from what I know to be the right thing to do. CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 8628	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:12:00 - [460] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: Thanks for feedback Natu and I do take it on board. Just a couple of points. I quoted Malkai in the the post you quoted because he was the last person (but not the only) in the thread to speak of asking for research. Nothing personal Malkai o7. I made no mention of names, so its a big assumption that I meant you particular. But I apologise if I've caused you to believe so, when as you say you didn't demand but you were the first to question it. Secondly, as any member or former member of the CPM or CSM will tell, getting CCP to show them details of internal research is like pulling teeth. And they've signed an NDA. So the chances of getting such research posted publicly when it might involve proprietary information that CCP don't want making public, isn't something that could or should be reasonably expected. As to what you said here "If you can-¦t try to comprehend what players with unpopular opinions are saying, how can you represent them?", in this particular instance I'm the one with the unpopular opinion in this thread, because I think what Z has come up with is pretty damn good and I've spent 23 pages defending him. Being a member of CPM does mean that that I would have act as an advocate for the players. But am I not allowed an opinion? Would I be expected to slavishly agree with everything that was said by the players? Of course not, I'd be riddled with indecision and be of no use to the playerbase or to CCP. I have to look at all the information from both sides, form an opinion as to the best way to proceed that will not only benefit the players but benefit the long term future of the game. And Z's system in my judgement, will do both. It needs the odd tweak but it's how we should go. Is that the popular view? Judging by this thread so far, certainly not. My reasoning for such an unpopular stance is an ugly truth. The player numbers are dwindling. Radical changes in thinking are needed and long held assumption must be cast away if this game is to greenlit and successful. Simply tinkering with the current systems in game is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It needs a rocket fuelled enema kicking up its arse. Legion has to be greenlit, if it isn't, it's game over. For it to be greenlit, CCP need it to be a success. Rouge and Z were brought in for a reason. Check out their histories. They've worked on a long line of successful FTP games. A proven track record. The Dev's are more fired up and energised for this than I've ever seen them in the past and Rouge is the reason why. I'll of course be a strong voice for the players and do everything I can to help them in the CPM or not. But right now, on this issue, I have to be on CCP's side because the long term future of the game is at stake here. If that makes me unpopular so be it. If it loses me your vote, so be it. But I will not back down from what I know to be the right thing to do. There will always be disagreements with something. Anyways, what do you think of my proposal for the skill progression? On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.

Stupid Blueberry Nova Corps Marines Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 502	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:16:00 - [461] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: CCP Z wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Feedback on Progression I like a lot the sidegrades idea and that is something that our Design Team is currently looking at (more or less modules, different weapon types, different abilities like being able to hack or not ...) At Fanfest you mentioned after the race choice in the skill tree there are these specializations. Can you give any examples or details about these specializations? If the commando doesn't make it into Legion, can there be an assault specialization with 2 light weapons? possibly at the cost of something else. Also, can you share some monetization ideas? The current default Assault has two light weapons. Commandos haven't really been worked on yet, but if they stick around it's likely they'll have a new role. That's badass. Chillin, waitin on Legion. Ishukone loyalist, Caldari Scout enthusiast!
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1324	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:28:00 - [462] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Actually Z has already posted in the positive in regard to the ISIS question. I know we've had a few disagreements in this discussion. I drafted up a progression proposal and made a thread. The goal is to retain the depth of the existing system but make it more accessible for new players. As the CEO of the most well-known and respected organizations for training new players, and as a CPM 1 candidate, I would really appreciate any feedback you might have. You would probably have some unique and useful insights. I'll be posting in it shortly. o7 CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5658	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:32:00 - [463] - Quote Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: The current skill system we have works to a certain extent but has it's obvious problems. 1/3/5 is bad. Items should be unlocked at 1 and every point after should provide a bonus. Why is this difficult? Guess you were so angry you completely missed the part where they practically described the system being exactly like this. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 8628	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:36:00 - [464] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: The current skill system we have works to a certain extent but has it's obvious problems. 1/3/5 is bad. Items should be unlocked at 1 and every point after should provide a bonus. Why is this difficult? Guess you were so angry you completely missed the part where they practically described the system being exactly like this. That's usually what happens in a 23-page thread. EDIT: Woops! 24 pages now. EDIT2: My only concern about the new progression system is that I would be forced into training up a suit I don't want for a weapon that I like. That to me is an even bigger SP sink than what Dust currently has. On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
Spartan MK420 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 354	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:40:00 - [465] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: CCP Z wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Feedback on Progression I like a lot the sidegrades idea and that is something that our Design Team is currently looking at (more or less modules, different weapon types, different abilities like being able to hack or not ...) Just remember, Sentinels are a bit War Point starved as it is. If you take away their ability to hack, you need to be thinking about ways to give them another way of generating some WP other than just slaying. (Not against the idea, just raising an issue you need to consider.) damage received 10pts Official Unofficial D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N team mascot.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5659	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:43:00 - [466] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: The current skill system we have works to a certain extent but has it's obvious problems. 1/3/5 is bad. Items should be unlocked at 1 and every point after should provide a bonus. Why is this difficult? Guess you were so angry you completely missed the part where they practically described the system being exactly like this. That's usually what happens in a 23-page thread. EDIT: Woops! 24 pages now. EDIT2: My only concern about the new progression system is that I would be forced into training up a suit I don't want for a weapon that I like. That to me is an even bigger SP sink than what Dust currently has. Not really. Guy said that it would be really easy to get stuff and that most of your SP investment in the early-game would be spent on unlocks, not so much bonuses. I like to think that once you get to the racial bit (since it's Academy > Frame > Role > Racial > Specialization) you're focusing more on fine-tuning and turning your dials than you are setting everything up. Making your playstyle more powerful as opposed to getting stuff for it. What with a system where you don't have to get Dropsuit Command 3 > Amarr Heavy 3 > Amarr Sentinel 1, it seems like it'd be a hell of a lot easier to blaze through to the suit you want and then focus on all the extra stuff. I know a lot of people are saying that "modules/weapons shouldn't be locked behind roles" but honestly, I can't see much of a reason you'd need Profile Dampeners and Myrofibril Stimulants on a Sentinel xD Big problem I see right now is that people are so angry, they're not doing their research/reading to find the answers. I mean, there is a "First Dev Post" button in the upper right and then you can just click on the blue banners to go to the next one =P Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Spartan MK420 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 355	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:50:00 - [467] - Quote As for the respec option. I would say it would be ok...but as long as you only get 1, and once you use it, you never get another one. :p Official Unofficial D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N team mascot.
Cyrius Li-Moody 0uter.Heaven 5365	Posted - 2014.05.17 16:50:00 - [468] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Maken Tosch wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: The current skill system we have works to a certain extent but has it's obvious problems. 1/3/5 is bad. Items should be unlocked at 1 and every point after should provide a bonus. Why is this difficult? Guess you were so angry you completely missed the part where they practically described the system being exactly like this. That's usually what happens in a 23-page thread. EDIT: Woops! 24 pages now. EDIT2: My only concern about the new progression system is that I would be forced into training up a suit I don't want for a weapon that I like. That to me is an even bigger SP sink than what Dust currently has. Not really. Guy said that it would be really easy to get stuff and that most of your SP investment in the early-game would be spent on unlocks, not so much bonuses. I like to think that once you get to the racial bit (since it's Academy > Frame > Role > Racial > Specialization) you're focusing more on fine-tuning and turning your dials than you are setting everything up. Making your playstyle more powerful as opposed to getting stuff for it. What with a system where you don't have to get Dropsuit Command 3 > Amarr Heavy 3 > Amarr Sentinel 1, it seems like it'd be a hell of a lot easier to blaze through to the suit you want and then focus on all the extra stuff. I know a lot of people are saying that "modules/weapons shouldn't be locked behind roles" but honestly, I can't see much of a reason you'd need Profile Dampeners and Myrofibril Stimulants on a Sentinel xD Big problem I see right now is that people are so angry, they're not doing their research/reading to find the answers. I mean, there is a "First Dev Post" button in the upper right and then you can just click on the blue banners to go to the next one =P I won't get into a argument with you but I read the post, watched the progression videos. I know they brought up tiericide. Merely echoing problems with our current system even if they've already been stated to be covered. Thanks for your concern though. Youtuber. Your friendly neighborhood whiskey-fueled merc.
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 8628	Posted - 2014.05.17 17:04:00 - [469] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Not really. Guy said that it would be really easy to get stuff and that most of your SP investment in the early-game would be spent on unlocks, not so much bonuses. I like to think that once you get to the racial bit (since it's Academy > Frame > Role > Racial > Specialization) you're focusing more on fine-tuning and turning your dials than you are setting everything up. Making your playstyle more powerful as opposed to getting stuff for it. What with a system where you don't have to get Dropsuit Command 3 > Amarr Heavy 3 > Amarr Sentinel 1, it seems like it'd be a hell of a lot easier to blaze through to the suit you want and then focus on all the extra stuff. I know a lot of people are saying that "modules/weapons shouldn't be locked behind roles" but honestly, I can't see much of a reason you'd need Profile Dampeners and Myrofibril Stimulants on a Sentinel xD Big problem I see right now is that people are so angry, they're not doing their research/reading to find the answers. I mean, there is a "First Dev Post" button in the upper right and then you can just click on the blue banners to go to the next one =P That is because New Eden is all about flexibility. Almost every FPS out there allows some form of flexibility. Halo ODST and Halo 4 has a similar system in place where a player can fit whatever weapon they like regardless of what their armor looks like (even though technically it's a same armor). From a non-FPS stand point, Eve Online offers the flexibility to fit a mining laser on a battleship if we wanted to. It won't be as effective as a dedicated mining ship like the Exhumers, but it's flexibility none the less. So if someone wants to fit profile dampeners and Myrofibrils on a Sentinel, then that's their choice. That's their business, not yours or CCP's. On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2025	Posted - 2014.05.17 17:44:00 - [470] - Quote Great first post, thanks for the information and opening up this discussion. I also enjoyed watching your fanfest presentation which I will be referencing back to frequently. CCP Z wrote: We will offer a Respec Option (which does not exist in DUST 514). More information will come down the line as the projectGÇÖs development progresses. This part concerns me. In light of the fanfest presentation the respec option seems to be a corrosive one. If the progression tree is created to be accessible and useful to new players then the need for a respec is greatly reduced, even more so with the inclusion of a more effective matchmaking system (meta score) and the more robust academy experience. Adding a respec also seems to reduce the value of the long term diversity intended in the progression system (again as per fanfest). It is obvious that removing all by the proto version of a weapon or piece of gear, such as you described with the mass driver, removes a certain aspect of player choice. You do a good job of presenting the benefits of this change, but how are those benefits, such as long term exploration of the game, going to exist in an environment with repeatable limitless respecs? Further, while I adamantly support your preservation of the ability to mix and match mods, weapons, suits et al once unlocked, how are you going to prevent (even within the meta score system) massive FotM swings (and the economic shocks that come with them) from negatively impacting the games meta and NPE? N New players will bear a greater burden from FotM under a limitless respec system in that they will not have as much SP to reallocate and thus a lessor ability to customize. The advantage provided by more SP under your proposed progression system without respecs seems robust and balance by the meaningful choices a player makes within that persistent context, with respecs however the value of the progression system is largely eroded as vet players will now be able to run whatever combination they so desire and will have the deeper knowledge of min/maxing in game systems so that even the meta score will be unlikely to truly mitigate a new type of proto stomping. (To be clear, I am speaking very literally here about the total number of respecs per character. I am not commenting on the frequency of respecs.) I realize the details of the respec system have not be released yet which is why I feel this is an appropriate time to bring these concerns to the fore, prior to that system being finalized and unveiled. Moving on; Meta Score appears to be a great conceptual way to enhance matchmaking BPO dropsuits, and player stats attached to them, is an elegant way to add a sense of persistence for players without removing the risk vs reward of the sandbox (as fittings will still be consumed and have real costs in time, ISK and SP). A shift towards Tiericide within weapons is appealing but needs to be handled carefully so as not do deviate into a Diablo style loot grind (the Diablo games are fun in their own right, but just like EVE:O should not be directly copy-pasted over Legion nor should games like DIII be role models for how Legion functions) Player market - This is key to many aspects of the game, having it sooner rather than later is very important, and avoiding an oversimplified "auction house" method is vital. This is the single area most important to take inspiration from EVE:O in that working towards a player market, a true asset life cycle and a market economy which contains meaningful elements of location, supply, and dynamic change are all highly pertinent. Of course, just like in the history of EVE:O some of this will be built over time, but as a high level goal I cannot state enough how important this aspect is. We are in New Eden - The existence of Legion within New Eden, not simply within the New Eden IP, is also very important. One key aspect of that is not to make it dependent in EVE:O, which you've made strong strides toward with the current progression system in when and how you are introducing the races. Please continue to have that same outlook advise other aspects of development. I realize my last two points are arguably outside of progression, however they are important to consider as progression is defined, as they hold implications for balance, accessibility, etc of the very items being unlocked and effected by the progression system. I'll wrap up my first post in this discussion by reiterating that while I understand respecs are an often requested mechanic they still seem like a very risky, and hasty, design choice as I have yet to see even a theoretical method by which unlimited respecs can exist while still legitimately maintaining a meaningful and persistant sandbox. In short, if you start to remove the risks you denigrate the value of the rewards and stifle both emotional investiture and emergent game play. 0.02 ISK Cross PS ~ Now to go and read the other 23 pages of this thread. SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2025	Posted - 2014.05.17 17:58:00 - [471] - Quote Jonny D Buelle wrote: Heinz Doofenshertz wrote: CCP Z wrote: We will offer a Respec Option (which does not exist in DUST 514). More information will come down the line as the projectGÇÖs development progresses. While I agree that in some games a Respec option is a good thing. as you may get to a point in the game where all the choices you have made are completely obsolete or bad. In New Eden no choice should ever be made lightly, nor should they be easily changed. As no spent skill is every really wasted, it might not be useful right now, but you may run into a situation later on where you'll need it and wow I already have that skill. New Eden is very much a place of choices, however, making a choice needs to have weight as it does now. I play Logi, and Assault, if I spend skill points into a heavy tree to test it out and decide I don't like how it plays fine. but I shouldn't be able to just undo those choices. There are limited occasons I would say respecs ok. The end of the NPE, because you just finished learning how to play and probably made bad choices before learning how important choices are. When major changes to the skill system are made, IE you removed 15 skills I had, refunding those points I'm ok with. Making it so that I decide I don't like the skills I have paying 5 bucks and being able to completely redo my entire tree smacks all the choices in the face, and then hampers me in my ability to use the new gear I just got, because I have not properly progressed thru the tree learning how this style plays. which means I might also not like it. I know many people are used to this being an option in other games, but it does not really fit with New Eden. yes it makes it a bit harder for some, and makes others think they are trapped with bad choices, but this is because they didn't understand the system in the first place and don't understand why it is that way. If these are addressed early on in the NPE, like having people pick certain skills, explaining that choices are important and that, as I suggested above they can reassign them once they finish, but afterwards their choices both with their skills and their trigger pulls are important, and needed to be treated that way. I would like to point out to you that EVE does offer a variation of a respec in the form of Remapping your attributes (Wisdom, Charisma, Endurance etc.) to better suit your progression in the game. Yes it is different than a respec but it can still be considered respeccing. (source and reading on remapping https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Neural_remapping) You do make some valid points, and I agree that the respec should only be given at the end of NPE. God knows how grateful I was when 1.0 came with a full respec. I messed up massively in my first month. I think that if CCP does intend to do respecs, make it a yearly thing and even then only a partial respec. EG: Respec Weaponry, Respec Dropsuit Command etc. Remapping is a very real thing, you are correct. It is not however in any sense a respec. Remapping is a persistent choice, once yearly you can alter your attributes to *specialize your future SP gains. It does not alter any currently existing skills, it does not refund anything, and the enhanced training speed gained within the specialized areas comes at the cost of reduced training speed in the areas outside of that specialization. Remapping allows for high level player manipulation of their planed skill progression, what it does not do is offer an 'out' from the ramifications or persistence of any choice a player has already made. All of that being said, a one time only* free respec coming out of the Academy seems reasonable, as does the occasional allowance of SP reallocation in the face of any total skill tree overhaul/the outright removal of specific skills, but such cases should be vanishingly rare and certainly not a planned recurring feature. 0.02 ISK Cross SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 8631	Posted - 2014.05.17 18:39:00 - [472] - Quote Cross Atu wrote: All of that being said, a one time only free respec coming out of the Academy seems reasonable, as does the occasional allowance of SP reallocation in the face of any total skill tree overhaul/the outright removal of specific skills, but such cases should be vanishingly rare and certainly not a planned recurring feature. 0.02 ISK Cross This I agree. A one-time respec after graduating from the Academy should be the extent of it. 2-5 million SP seems to be the common metric everyone is going by for this case. On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
Vell0cet Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 2060	Posted - 2014.05.17 18:45:00 - [473] - Quote As an alternative to respecs how do you guys feel about character sales for ISK, with an AUR transaction fee paid by the buyer? Best PvE idea ever!
Malkai Inos Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1339	Posted - 2014.05.17 18:57:00 - [474] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Cross Atu wrote: All of that being said, a one time only free respec coming out of the Academy seems reasonable, as does the occasional allowance of SP reallocation in the face of any total skill tree overhaul/the outright removal of specific skills, but such cases should be vanishingly rare and certainly not a planned recurring feature. 0.02 ISK Cross This I agree. A one-time respec after graduating from the Academy should be the extent of it. 2-5 million SP seems to be the common metric everyone is going by for this case. I actually think 2-5M SP of Academy as we know it carries the risk of "ADV-stomping" if you will. Let's remember that accruing 1,5M SP takes the better part of your first month unless you consistently cap out/boost. That's the critical first weeks during which players develop basic muscle memory, get a first STD/ADV fitting and get an overall grasp on tactics/teamplay. These few weeks can create a quite significant power disparity to the detriment of the newest players so the academy should really not extend beyond a few days average playtime or have very stringent metalevel limitations so that players are at least very closely matched with equally geared players. That's where i think the metalevel concept can and ought to shine. Assuming SP buildup works identical to how it does right now, which it most likely won't of course. You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1011	Posted - 2014.05.17 19:13:00 - [475] - Quote Cross Atu wrote: [quote=Jonny D Buelle][quote=Heinz Doofenshertz][quote=CCP Z] .... Respec & Remap discussion CCP Z and other respec/remap posters... What are your thoughts on introducing an attribute type system into Legion? The attribute mechanic is a tried and true staple of MMO, RPG, and many FPS games. This could be a nice way of increasing depth and choice into the system. The way the EVE system uses attributes to accelerate skill learning (or perhaps in our case skill specific SP) could be a useful start point. Attributes could also be a nice way to have some passive bonuses that are agnostic of suit, role, module introduced. Example...you could build up a "strength / conditioning" type attribute that gave mild buffs to base speed, climbing, jumping, and perhaps lowered armor encumbrance penalty. This would be independent of the traditional Biotics skill branch. You could easily extrapolate for other applicable uses such as weapon accuracy, stamina, accelerated learning of specific skills. Thoughts on applicability to progression in Legion? "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1011	Posted - 2014.05.17 19:20:00 - [476] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: As an alternative to respecs how do you guys feel about character sales for ISK, with an AUR transaction fee paid by the buyer? Big fan of this idea. It's a staple of the in game creativity and entrepreneurship of EVE players and offers some interesting options for monetization in and out of game. To be clear...I don't know that if can replace respec options within the envisioned system. I certainly think it can, and should, give players options to access certain skills and roles without them personally doing the grind...essentially compensating someone lee for the grind. "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1325	Posted - 2014.05.17 19:50:00 - [477] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Actually Z has already posted in the positive in regard to the ISIS question. I know we've had a few disagreements in this discussion. I drafted up a progression proposal and made a thread. The goal is to retain the depth of the existing system but make it more accessible for new players. As the CEO of the most well-known and respected organizations for training new players, and as a CPM 1 candidate, I would really appreciate any feedback you might have. You would probably have some unique and useful insights. I've posted in there now Vell0cet. Sorry it took so long. o7 Now of to Maken Tosch's... CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
Starfire Revo DUST University Ivy League 254	Posted - 2014.05.17 19:51:00 - [478] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: As an alternative to respecs how do you guys feel about character sales for ISK, with an AUR transaction fee paid by the buyer? Wouldn't work as well in a free to play game as there would be little to nothing preventing someone from making 100+ characters and passively letting them skill up. Aeon Amadi wrote: I know a lot of people are saying that "modules/weapons shouldn't be locked behind roles" but honestly, I can't see much of a reason you'd need Profile Dampeners and Myrofibril Stimulants on a Sentinel xD Due to the Sentinel's high base melee damage, it's actually a good option to put 2x Myofibrils on a suit if you're running a Forge Gun. This gives you the ability to instantly kill scouts who get too close. Putting 2x Dampeners on a heavy frame allows you to be immune to vehicle scans, standard gal logi scans, advanced scanners, most scouts with no precision mods and most medium frames that don't have at least 2 precision mods. It's a viable way to fill 2 low slots if you're looking to surprise any of the above. I make videos of EVE and Dust http://www.youtube.com/mrgimbleb I write about EVE and Dust http://mrgimbleb.blogspot.com
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1325	Posted - 2014.05.17 20:18:00 - [479] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Since we're on the topic of Progression and it's a very hot topic from the looks of it, I have a proposal that CCP Z should read up on. Project Legion Skill Progression Proposal - By Maken Tosch It's probably not as elaborate as others have posted, but it's a proposal that I feel needs attention, particularly CCP Z's. It would be nice to compare our ideas to see how much of us are on the same page. Also, my proposal comes with a twist. Hope you like it. Some nice ideas there Maken. I do like the notion of the academy skill giving some sort of bonus however the reduction of the training cost modifier reduced is troubling to me as the TCM is required to make longer term specialisation an SP sink for the vets. A reduction in that will reduce the depth of the tree while decreasing its height if you catch my meaning. However, your proposal suffered from the same problem that the current one has, in that its rather daunting to begin with for a new player when they should be encouraged to try as much as possible with no major concerns as to their SP expenditure. Those concerns should come later once they have discovered which role they like and want to specialise in. The game would then begin to offer larger rewards for such specialisation. CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
Luk Manag of Terror TRE GAFFEL 521	Posted - 2014.05.17 20:59:00 - [480] - Quote I had the impression from some of the interviews, articles, and presentations that a dissenting faction within CCP wished to toss out the core values (long term persistence in New Eden) and instead emphasize the newness of Legion as a "Fresh Start" on the Eve FPS. They were intentionally vague, to test the waters (sunk by orders from the top), and they will still want to push ahead with dramatic changes so they can market the 'new greatness' in a move typical of EA...slap a 2 on the end of the name and sell it again. We all agree it needed work, but all the secrecy, NDAs, and lack transparency are testing my faith in CCP to actually deliver on the Eve Forever vision. There will be bullets. ACR+SMG [CEO of Terror]



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.